Re: Draft New Draft

[John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>]

Javier,
	BRAVO.

John Broomfield.

> >> At 11:23 31/01/99 -0600, John B. Reynolds wrote:
> >> >
> >> >from the ORSC/AIP "Draft New Draft":
> >> >> At the inception of the DNSO, its members and supporters reaffirm the
> >> >> historical rules under which all participants in the domain name system
> >> >> have operated to date. Nothing about the creation of the DNSO
> >> is meant to  overturn the status quo as it exists at the inception.
> 
> >> Specifically, the
> >> >> DNSO reaffirms the rules under which the TLD registries and registrars
> >> >> have operated to date. 
> 
> How can DNSO reaffirm a set of rules through which all gTLDs have been run
> as a monopoly by one single company? The European Union Antitrust laws, for
> one, will not allow this type of arrangement.
> 
> How can DNSO reaffirm that we have to follow NSi Dispute Resolution Policy,
> when WIPO is setting up new rules fair to non-US rightholders?
> 
> How can DNSO reaffirm that the ccTLDs of some countries (aimed at having
> people from that country under one single domain) are in the hands of
> enterpreneurs who are asking DNSO to make sure that the country cannot take
> that domain back.
> 
> If what ORSC is asking is to reafirm the spirit under which the present
> domain system was built, I would wholeheartedly support that. 
> 
> If what ORSC wants is to use the letter of 1591 to support that DNSO
> maintains the deviations that have been created by the NSi monolopy or the
> fact that some ccTLDs are managed for profit in no relation with the
> country the ISO code belongs to, then I am definitely against. 
> 
> We are not here to defend the profit of a few againt the general interest
> of Internet users.
> 
> Javier
> 
> 
>